Contents

length of article

This article is very long, making it inconvenient to read. Most of the sections here seem to have their own pages. Editing is locked for regular users, so I can't do it, but has there been any discussion condensing the article to make it more reader-friendly? --JHunter 16:25, 26 January 2012 (EST)

I fail to see how that, or much of this article for that matter, is pertinent to an explanation of the general concept of homosexuality. Reading through an article with 29 sections of text is just laborious. Especially when most of the sections appear to already have their own articles. This is one of the flagship articles here, making it so over the top that newcomers are discouraged from reading it might be counterproductive to the cause. --JHunter 23:23, 26 January 2012 (EST)

Why don't you write an alternative article and see if the owner of the site likes it better? Show Conservapedia how it's done. I wish you the best should you decide to pursue this endeavor. Conservative 23:51, 26 January 2012 (EST)

Can you show us outstanding well researched works you have composed already? If so, where are they? Conservative 00:41, 27 January 2012 (EST)

In journals you've never heard of and books you'll never read. More seriously, you have offered a friendly competition. It is audacious, but I accept your challenge. Out of sportsmanship, we should let the articles speak for themselves instead of starting an argument on the talk page. --JHunter 01:44, 27 January 2012 (EST)

I regret that so-called "conservatives" (as meaningless a term as "liberals") have been so easily fooled by the whole "homosex-/gay" fraud of degenerate fascist propaganda that enslaves not just the lawless fascist lamestream media and Demo-nazi ringleaders but most of the world as well
(sadly including most if not all Bible translations since the 19th century who have perverted the true meaning of arsenokoitai by grossly mistranslating it as "homosexual" which is a bogus word of the aforementioned degenerate fascist propaganda machine that didn't exist much before the 18th century, almost nineteen centuries after Jesus)
that is well-refuted and exposed as a propaganda fraud by "The gay invention" at http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-10-036-f
Also relevant is Dr. Reisman's exposing of the vile fascist child-molesting degenerate Alfred Kinsey at www.DrJudithReisman.org showing how Kinsey has almost single-handedly (with much help from Indiana University) decimated America's morals jurisprudence by deceiving gullible politicians and judges over the past decades. Sadly all one must do is repeat lies often and long enough and fools will believe anything. User:RusseDav 09:52, 03 March 2012 (EST)

Pediatricians Renew Call for HPV Vaccine for Boys

The HPV vaccine has been available and recommended for girls and young women since 2006, because it's highly effective at preventing cervical cancer. Since then, other cancers thought to be caused by HPV have increased, including anal cancer and some head and neck cancers....If we include both girls and boys, we could have a potential impact on HPV transmission.[2]

Question: if homosexuality is genetic, and not a choice, why would all boys need to be vaccinated? Rob Smith 08:06, 28 February 2012 (EST)

Answer because HPV can be transmitted by heterosexual sex as well. Did you really need to ask that question? Davidspencer 09:46, 28 February 2012 (EST)

Bible Quotes

I have noticed that this page has quotations of verse from multiple forms of the Bible, including the King James, New American Standard, and New International Bibles. Should we not stick to one single version, so as to preserve the validity of our quotations of scripture? TheV 08:37, 11 May 2012 (EDT)

Homosexuality and human rights

I suggest to add section with above name on recent ruling of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg. The interesting text reads like this:

"The Strasbourg ruling won praise from campaigners against same-sex marriage. ...

Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, said: ‘For too long campaigners have been using the language of rights in an attempt to add moral force to what are nothing more than personal desires. ‘In many cases they have bypassed the democratic process and succeeded in imposing their views on the rest of the population by force of law. ‘We are seeing the same principle at work in the Government’s sham of a consultation on same-sex marriage.’He added: ‘The ruling from the ECHR will embolden those whose concerns about same-sex marriage and adoption are not inspired by personal hatred and animosity, but by a genuine concern for the well-being of children and the welfare of society. ‘Instead of rushing to legislate without seriously considering the views of the electorate, the Government should be encouraging a measured public debate on the nature and meaning of marriage.’"

AK, the article is about 50 pages long right now. I would suggest creating a separate article that could be linked to from the main article. Here is where you could start creating the article: Homosexuality and human rights. Conservative 06:32, 25 May 2012 (EDT)

Opinions?

I'm wondering if some of the content is too much based on opinions, such as the opinion that 'homosexuality' rather than homosexual acts are what is condemned by the Bible. I am very conservative and I found some of the content rather inflammatory, rather than objective. But that's just my impression of it, and I am new to Conservapedia.
--Nissalovescats 10:16, 29 May 2012 (EDT)

homosexulality and religion:

it is a proven fact that jesus christ never spoke against homosexuality. in fact, jesus himself in all records of his life never once condoned those of different beliefs. hundreds of years after the death of christ, passages pertaining to the diminishment of the rights of women, the reasons for hatred against those of other or no religious beliefs, and the lessons that homosexuality is unnatural were added by people like Constantine and king James. if you feel you are a "true christian," then listen to the words of your lord savior, not a roman emperor who wasn't even born a christian.

Whoever posted this (when i know not) was unsurprisingly anonymous, as it is clearly an absurd polemic. Not is this "red letter" hermeneutic that restricts Biblical moral teaching to only what Jesus said in the gospels invalid, but so it the argument from silence that it relies on.

The Lord did not personally write any Scripture down, and the gospel of John promises more revelation from Jesus, (Jn. 16:12-15) and the same Holy Spirit that inspired the writers who wrote the Lord's words also inspired the O.t., which Jesus quoted as well as the rest of the writings which were because manifest as Scripture. And the fact is homosexual relations are only condemned wherever they are dealt with and are nowhere sanctioned, despite the laborious attempts by pro homosexual polemicists to force sex into passages it does not belong in. See Homosexuality and biblical interpretation

Moreover, restricting morality to what Jesus specifically addressed would also allow pedophilia, bestiality and other things.

Moreover, the Lord did condemn homosexual relations by specifying that what God sexually joined together was male and female, (Mt. 19:4-6) leaving all other sexual relations as fornication, and which He condemned. (Mk. 7:21-23)

God made man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, in more ways than the physical aspect, and only joined them in marriage, which Jesus Himself specified. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4-6) Homosexual unions are only condemned by God in the Scriptures by design and decree, in principle and in precept.

It is because of this that pro homosexual polemicists engage in sophistry in trying to negate the injunctions against homosexual relations and find sanction for the same, and the hermeneutics they must use would also negate any moral law, and the authority of the Scripture themselves.

However, some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again. And who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God. Daniel1212 21:21, 6 December 2012 (EST)

New pertinent story

Is the strong cultural focus on sex as a reproductive tool the reason masturbation and homosexual practices seem to be virtually unknown among the Aka and Ngandu? That isn't clear. But the Hewletts did find that their informants -- whom they knew well from years of field work -- "were not aware of these practices, did not have terms for them," and, in the case of the Aka, had a hard time even understanding about what the researchers were asking when they asked about homosexual behaviors.

And note that pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness (Ezek. 16:49) was concomitant with Sodom which was given to fornication, including that of the most perverse sort. (Ezek. 16:50; Jude 1:7) Daniel1212 21:32, 6 December 2012 (EST)